You are here

Home › Serious non-political crime ›

EDAL case summaries

ECtHR Krasniqi v. Austria (no. 41697/12)

Country of Applicant: Kosovo
Keywords: Cessation of protection, Family unity (right to), Serious non-political crime, Subsidiary Protection

Every country has the right to control the entry and residence of aliens in its territory. Withdrawal of subsidiary protection from individuals convicted of serious crimes and subsequent expulsion does not violate their right to family life under Article 8, when there are alternative means of communication, non-severed cultural ties with the motherland and a reasonable prospect of return after the entry ban expiry.

 
Date: 25-04-2017

Denmark - the Refugee Appeals Board’s decision of 6 February 2017

Country of Decision: Denmark
Country of Applicant: Syria
Keywords: Credibility assessment, Crime against humanity, Exclusion from protection, Internal armed conflict, Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Political Opinion, Real risk, Refugee Status, Relevant Facts, Serious non-political crime, War crimes

The applicant, who had deserted the Syrian army, was seen in isolation covered by the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (1) [refugee status]. However, the Board found serious reasons to assume that the applicant had committed a crime against humanity and war crimes during his military service and consequently he was excluded from protection. Nevertheless, the Danish Aliens Act Art. 31, (2) is an obstacle to his expulsion as he would risk persecution covered by the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (1) in the case of returning to Syria.
Date: 06-02-2017

Netherlands - Court of The Hague, 3 December 2015, AWB 15/1712

Country of Decision: Netherlands
Country of Applicant: Syria
Keywords: Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN, Assessment of facts and circumstances, Country of origin, Crime against humanity, First country of asylum, Nationality, Obligation/Duty to cooperate, Personal circumstances of applicant, Relevant Facts, Serious non-political crime, War crimes, Well-founded fear

This case is concerned with whether the decision to deny the asylum application and the subsequently imposed entry ban were justified based on articles 1F(a)-(c). Under these provisions the Secretary of State can raise national security as a ‘serious ground’ for his decision if an element of ‘personal participation’ can be proven.
Date: 03-12-2015

UK - Court of Appeal, AH (Algeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, 14 October 2015

Country of Decision: United Kingdom
Country of Applicant: Algeria
Keywords: Exclusion from protection, Serious non-political crime

Article 1F of the Refugee Convention relates to the application of a definition and not whether an individual seeking asylum should obtain protection or not. Therefore, and with regards to Article 1F(b), any post-offence conduct does not serve to mitigate the seriousness of an alleged non-political offence. No doctrine of expiation is to, thus, be applied to Article 1F(b).

The term serious used in Article 1F(b) denotes especially grave offending and requires no further qualification by the term “particularly." 
Date: 14-10-2015

CJEU - C‑373/13, H. T. v Land Baden-Württemberg

Country of Applicant: Turkey
Keywords: Exclusion from protection, Non-refoulement, Serious non-political crime, Terrorism

The judgment concerns the scope of Article 21 of Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 with regards to derogation from protection from refoulement and the possibility to revoke a residence permit issued to a refugee pursuant to Article 24 of said Directive. 
Date: 24-06-2015

UK - Upper Tribunal (Asylum and Immigration Chamber), AH (Article 1F(b)), [2013] UKUT 00382

Country of Decision: United Kingdom
Country of Applicant: Algeria
Keywords: Exclusion from protection, Serious non-political crime, Terrorism

This case concerned the meaning of “serious” in Article 1F(b): the Court had to decide whether the crime of participating in a criminal association with a terrorist aim was sufficiently serious enough to exclude the applicant from international protection.
Date: 25-07-2013

Germany - Federal Administrative Court, 4 September 2012, 10 C 13.11

Country of Decision: Germany
Country of Applicant: Turkey
Keywords: Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN, Exclusion from protection, First country of asylum, Protection, Refugee Status, Safe third country, Serious non-political crime, Terrorism

1. The issue as to whether an asylum-seeker was already protected against political persecution in a third country is only relevant in terms of  the asylum application for recognition of refugee status in the context of the concept of the first country of asylum as defined in EU law in Article 29 of the Asylum Procedures Act (Articles 25 and 26 of the Asylum Procedures Directive).  

2. If the Federal Office has reached a decision on the asylum application in this case, the substantive question of the subsidiarity of refugee protection in the assessment of refugee status is...
Date: 04-09-2012

Germany - High Administrative Court of Sachsen-Anhalt, 26 July 2012, 2 L 68/10

Country of Decision: Germany
Country of Applicant: Russia
Keywords: Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN, Crime against humanity, Exclusion from protection, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, International armed conflict, Previous persecution, Refugee Status, Serious non-political crime, Standard of proof, Subsidiary Protection, Torture, War crimes

This case concerned exclusion from refugee status on the basis of a war crime and a serious non-political crime.

A Chechen who was involved in the Second Chechen War - outside of the general combat action - in the killing and wounding of Russian soldiers and the kidnapping of a Russian officer to force the release of another Chechen is at risk of being exposed to torture or at least inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in the Russian Federation. 
Date: 26-07-2012

Greece - Council of State, 8 May 2012, Application No. 1661/2012

Country of Decision: Greece
Country of Applicant: India
Keywords: Actor of persecution or serious harm, Exclusion from protection, Humanitarian considerations, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Protection, Refugee Status, Religion, Serious non-political crime, Subsidiary Protection

Application for annulment of a decision by the Minister of Public Order.

This case concerned special protection status in accordance with the 1951 Refugee Convention andexclusion from protection of those who have committed a serious crime under “common law”. The crime committed by the applicant (attempted murder of the Indian Ambassador in Romania) does not fall within the concepts of “political”, “composite” or “related” crimes, even if it was carried out because of the offender's political opinions or principles, or with the intent of achieving such aims. The implementation of the...
Date: 08-05-2012

Austria- Constitutional Court, 13 December 2011, U1907/10

Country of Decision: Austria
Country of Applicant: Russia
Keywords: Exclusion from protection, Indiscriminate violence, Internal armed conflict, Revocation of protection status, Serious non-political crime, Subsidiary Protection

As a result of six convictions owing to trivial offences against property, subsidiary protection was withdrawn from the Applicant, as he would represent a danger to the general public. The Constitutional Court revoked this decision as unconstitutional: the Asylum Court had not interpreted the corresponding national stipulation in accordance with the Directives as the crimes committed were not of the seriousness required in Art 17 Qualification Directive.
Date: 13-12-2011

Pages

Filter by case summary type

Filter by applicable legal provisions

Filter by date

Filter by country of applicant

Filter by country of decision